SH: "Because we in the fancy are critical of commercially bred dogs for being of poor quality and we see that difference as a way to separate us from them. We are striving to improve the breed and are very emotionally invested in our dogs and we see the commercial breeders as dollar driven and uncaring. Yet, if no one with good/better dogs will breed to them how are they supposed to improve type and temperament?" I don't think we in the Fancy want them to have better dogs because we like that separation and like most people in the Fancy I'm a bit of a control freak about my dogs. I never sell pet puppies without spay/neuter agreement as well as limited registrations nor do I breed my stud dogs to bitches outside. I rarely sell show dogs outside my group of friends and long time co owners because I couldn't control where the dogs go or what happens to them. So although from a strictly stockman's point of view, Denny's suggestion was a very practical solution to a valid criticism of the commercial breeding industry. The firestorm it touched off in the Fancy illustrates how much we are invested in keeping ourselves separate from "them". I don't want to participate in it and I don't believe it is the Fancy's responsibility or obligation to participate in it and certainly no one on the HVBC or at the kennel club is suggesting that the Fancy participate in it.

“I believe the commercial interests will import better stock if they can't find it here; they certainly have the money and staff to accomplish this, especially with the influence of the Internet, and if they believe it will give them an economic advantage they will do it."

SH: "That’s true and the Fancy has taken a dramatic shift from those days of large kennels as was the custom of the top kennels fifty/sixty years ago. We are what we say we are, hobby breeders who do this for the love of dogs. So I think that’s why many of us feel threatened by the commercial breeders who have at their disposal immense quantities of money, political power, time and facilities. No wonder we feel threatened with AKC’s dialog with them. They are our competition for good pet puppy homes!

"We are trying to maintain breeding kennels with very small numbers and sometimes that is difficult when you want to bring something back into your line or make an improvement and you don’t have first hand knowledge because you can’t have those dogs in your own possession. And over the years we talked ourselves into saying well one of the criteria of a good breeder is that you don’t breed very much. You breed small numbers and you only breed for yourself. We have other jobs, we don’t derive our income from dogs so we can’t manage a large number of dogs as effectively as a commercial breeder."

SH: "Oh no, in fact one of the reasons I wanted to be on the committee is that I have been involved in rescue since 1978. We rescue 25 to 30 Bloodhounds every year because we were concerned about the animal rights movement and we realized the dogs coming out of the shelters were reproductively intact. The point is we started rescue because we felt we were the experts in Bloodhounds and who else was going to do this? That’s how I feel about the Fancy and the AKC. We are the experts. We know more about dogs than anyone else and we should be the people that the public goes to for information.

"So having said that, I think in the last few years the AKC has really gone forward in trying to give the Fancy the tools that we need. They formed the Canine Health Information Center, every other year we have the Parent Club Conferences, so more than ever AKC is providing information to help the Fancy. So along with encouraging proper care and conditions and authenticity of parentage, we’ve also developed ways for people to get better and more accurate information about dogs. I think its also interesting that we have an Investigations Department, we have a Judge's Department and a Special Services department, but we don't have a Breeder's Department. It is important to have a department dedicated to fulfilling the needs of the hobby breeder. Pat Laurens' efforts to initiate breeder's education conferences was hugely successful in California and evidenced a great interest among the Fancy."

SH: "Well one of the reasons for me being on this committee is that I have been involved in all aspects of the sport but I knew nothing about commercial breeders. I only know what we see on TV and I see their dogs come through rescue so I wanted to learn more about this. The Fancy in general tends to be reactive. The reaction to Denny Kodner’s column is an example. So it’s great for everyone to say let’s get them out, let’s shut down the commercial kennels, as though we had the power to put them out of business. They are doing very well with their own registries and we are still rescuing their dogs!"

SH: "Well first let me deal with the perception that this committee is somehow going to lower standards for everyone in order to accommodate the high volume breeders. That has never, ever been on anyone’s mind at all. In fact, we have actually raised the standards for parentage and identification, and if we continue to raise those standards it will eliminate a lot of these commercially bred dogs from the AKC registry. So what does that mean to AKC down the road? Lower income? Certainly from fewer registrations. Prestige from numbers? So there will be fewer AKC dogs, do we care? Can we raise the bar and attach real meaning to "AKC" registered? Yes! But how about our continued ability to influence good things for dogs in general and purebred dogs in particular? How about our ability to continue the tradition and philosophy of our sport and the purposes for which our dogs were developed? That could be in real question if we try to exclude large numbers of purebreds from our registry based solely on arbitrary standards and numbers rather than performance and behavior.

"Those commercial folks will still be there, I at least, will still be rescuing their Bloodhounds and the Fancy will still be on the receiving end of condemnation and legislation from animal rights groups."

SH: "You’re right, we don’t want to be involved in that and we don’t want to think about it. You see, that is the answer. It is not will AKC do it but how will AKC do it? In other words, if you can’t get them on care and condition, and you can’t get them out because of problems on registration matters, and their dogs look like the breed they are supposed to look like, then what criteria could AKC put into place that would exclude them? We currently have no other criteria that could exclude them. So what criteria could that be if that was what the AKC decided to do? To what standards are we willing to hold ourselves accountable?"